Author Topic: 2020 POTUS Candidates  (Read 292318 times)

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3100 on: May 03, 2020, 12:52:33 PM »
Am increasingly convinced this is bad news in terms of the odds of defeating Trump in 2020. Amash sounds more and more like the sort of candidate who would appeal to voters who are solidly anti-Trump but not particularly sold on various parts of the mainstream democratic party platform.

In talking to folks I know in New York and California, I think they may underestimate how much of Biden's current support in the polls is coming from people who are strongly anti-Trump but not necessarily pro-democratic party priorities.
He is getting any Democratic votes, he is just a warmed over Republican.

maizefolk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4861
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3101 on: May 03, 2020, 01:42:18 PM »
Am increasingly convinced this is bad news in terms of the odds of defeating Trump in 2020. Amash sounds more and more like the sort of candidate who would appeal to voters who are solidly anti-Trump but not particularly sold on various parts of the mainstream democratic party platform.

In talking to folks I know in New York and California, I think they may underestimate how much of Biden's current support in the polls is coming from people who are strongly anti-Trump but not necessarily pro-democratic party priorities.
He is getting any Democratic votes, he is just a warmed over Republican.

I don't disagree when it comes to Amash's appeal (or lack thereof) to people who consider themselves democrats. However, getting the votes of only registered democrats generally isn't enough to win elections at a national level.

That's not always true is you have a charismatic and exciting candidate what can drive a lot of new turnout from the base (Obama in 2008).

But Biden in 2020 isn't Obama in 2008. If Biden is going to win he will need a fair number of independents in addition to democrats.

bacchi

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5017
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3102 on: May 03, 2020, 02:11:43 PM »
Am increasingly convinced this is bad news in terms of the odds of defeating Trump in 2020. Amash sounds more and more like the sort of candidate who would appeal to voters who are solidly anti-Trump but not particularly sold on various parts of the mainstream democratic party platform.

In talking to folks I know in New York and California, I think they may underestimate how much of Biden's current support in the polls is coming from people who are strongly anti-Trump but not necessarily pro-democratic party priorities.
He is getting any Democratic votes, he is just a warmed over Republican.

I don't disagree when it comes to Amash's appeal (or lack thereof) to people who consider themselves democrats. However, getting the votes of only registered democrats generally isn't enough to win elections at a national level.

That's not always true is you have a charismatic and exciting candidate what can drive a lot of new turnout from the base (Obama in 2008).

But Biden in 2020 isn't Obama in 2008. If Biden is going to win he will need a fair number of independents in addition to democrats.

Why wouldn't Amash get just as many votes as Gary Johnson did in 2016? Why wouldn't Biden get just as many votes as Clinton, considering that they're both establishment candidates and same ol'-same ol'?

In that case, we're still looking at a sliver in MI and WI. If Amash attracts a tiny slice of Trump's votes in 2016 -- Trump voters who regret their vote -- then it's game over in those states.

In Florida, it's a little tougher but, thankfully, DeSantis is helping the Democrats there.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2273
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3103 on: May 03, 2020, 05:58:02 PM »
So - who is this guy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Amash

An Arab Republican from Michigan's conservative Dutch country.  Interesting. (former Republican)

He likes Friedrich Hayek.

Gotta throw this link in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk

Good that there will be alternatives for president.

Loved that econ rap. Really good. But Hayek's idea that we would have inflation when the boom times occurred turned out to not happen.

J Boogie

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1360
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3104 on: May 04, 2020, 03:34:02 PM »
Amash is probably the most professional, thoughtful, and well spoken 3rd candidate we've ever seen during a time where the main 2 parties are experiencing a dearth of these qualities.

He should do better than Gary Johnson as he probably knows what Aleppo is and probably won't stick out his tongue and try to talk during any interviews.

I think he's got a decent shot if he can generate Andrew Yang-esque internet popularity, but libertarians tend to be easy targets so people might be reticent to share their enthusiasm about his candidacy. Given his polish, transparency, and integrity - I think he'll be able to minimize that reticence.

v8rx7guy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1815
  • Location: Bellingham, WA
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3105 on: May 04, 2020, 03:37:22 PM »
Amash is probably the most professional, thoughtful, and well spoken 3rd candidate we've ever seen during a time where the main 2 parties are experiencing a dearth of these qualities.

He should do better than Gary Johnson as he probably knows what Aleppo is and probably won't stick out his tongue and try to talk during any interviews.

I think he's got a decent shot if he can generate Andrew Yang-esque internet popularity, but libertarians tend to be easy targets so people might be reticent to share their enthusiasm about his candidacy. Given his polish, transparency, and integrity - I think he'll be able to minimize that reticence.

It would be nice to have a 3rd choice in the actual debate too... 15% polling is a long ways away though.  I'd like to think that all the 3rd parties combined were over 10% at least in 2016, maybe it's possible.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3106 on: May 04, 2020, 06:38:07 PM »
Amash is probably the most professional, thoughtful, and well spoken 3rd candidate we've ever seen during a time where the main 2 parties are experiencing a dearth of these qualities.

He should do better than Gary Johnson as he probably knows what Aleppo is and probably won't stick out his tongue and try to talk during any interviews.

I think he's got a decent shot if he can generate Andrew Yang-esque internet popularity, but libertarians tend to be easy targets so people might be reticent to share their enthusiasm about his candidacy. Given his polish, transparency, and integrity - I think he'll be able to minimize that reticence.

It would be nice to have a 3rd choice in the actual debate too... 15% polling is a long ways away though.  I'd like to think that all the 3rd parties combined were over 10% at least in 2016, maybe it's possible.

They were not. Perot in 92 got 19% but won no votes, Wallace in 68 won 13% and something like 45 votes (but even that didn't swing the election)

If anything, I think he is more likely to throw the election to Trump. Biden's path to victory which likely includes winning MI, (unless Biden wins in a blowout with FL, AZ, and NC). Even if Amash could localize enough support to win a state like MI (he won't), that only increases the odds of the house deciding the president who would almost certainly select Trump.

Amash is running because he knows he can't win reelection. And if he can't even win his own district, then what is he wasting his time for? It'll secure him a spot in consulting, media, or a think tank.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3107 on: May 05, 2020, 06:50:49 AM »
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been told that it's only the Western part of lower Michigan that has the conservative bent where this Amash would make much of an impact.  I don't think he'd swing the state.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3108 on: May 05, 2020, 08:58:21 AM »
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been told that it's only the Western part of lower Michigan that has the conservative bent where this Amash would make much of an impact.  I don't think he'd swing the state.
“Correct me if I’m wrong...”
Well... you aren’t necessarily wrong.  Or right.  In 2016 Trump carried Michigan by fewer than 11,000 votes (out of over 4.5MM cast). Put another way Trump won by 0.3%
  If it’s that close again Amash could swing the state one way or another if he draws substantially more from one candidate than another.   

Putting some numbers behind it; assume slightly higher voter turnout of 4.8MM; if Amash wins just 2.5% of the vote (120,000 total votes)  then to swing the election we are talking 66,000 for candidate “B” and 54,000 for candidate A.   Or T. 

Bottom line - it doesnt’ take much when the margin of victory is <1% and the state is Winner Take All. 

J Boogie

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1360
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3109 on: May 05, 2020, 09:20:10 AM »
what is he wasting his time for? It'll secure him a spot in consulting, media, or a think tank.

Based on the fact that he turned down a Colbert slot after his impeachment vote, I don't think he's all that interested in the publicity or riches.

This is a guy who wrote an entire explanation of every single vote he took. There is every piece of evidence to suggest he is acting in good faith and no reason to suggest he is not.

He has made it clear that he views the Trump presidency as hazardous to the constitution and I think he does not shy away from sharing his view that Biden is lacking the alacrity for the most important position in the US, in addition to Biden showing he will continue the lack of financial responsibility which we've grown accustomed to ever since GWB.

My suspicion is that if the DNC would have ended up with someone like Buttigieg, he probably wouldn't be running. But what adult American isn't looking at the current candidates and shaking their head wishing for at least one of the following: Someone who hasn't been eligible for SS checks for the past decade, Someone who doesn't resort to bellicose chest thumping when challenged, someone who knows what the word bellicose means, or someone who isn't white.

I get that 3rd party runs are usually quixotic and somewhat immature. But in this case the 3rd party candidate is the most mature candidate in the race who has demonstrated the most serious approach to their job as a public servant.


Michael in ABQ

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
    • Military Saints
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3110 on: May 05, 2020, 09:57:24 AM »
what is he wasting his time for? It'll secure him a spot in consulting, media, or a think tank.

Based on the fact that he turned down a Colbert slot after his impeachment vote, I don't think he's all that interested in the publicity or riches.

This is a guy who wrote an entire explanation of every single vote he took. There is every piece of evidence to suggest he is acting in good faith and no reason to suggest he is not.

He has made it clear that he views the Trump presidency as hazardous to the constitution and I think he does not shy away from sharing his view that Biden is lacking the alacrity for the most important position in the US, in addition to Biden showing he will continue the lack of financial responsibility which we've grown accustomed to ever since GWB.

My suspicion is that if the DNC would have ended up with someone like Buttigieg, he probably wouldn't be running. But what adult American isn't looking at the current candidates and shaking their head wishing for at least one of the following: Someone who hasn't been eligible for SS checks for the past decade, Someone who doesn't resort to bellicose chest thumping when challenged, someone who knows what the word bellicose means, or someone who isn't white.

I get that 3rd party runs are usually quixotic and somewhat immature. But in this case the 3rd party candidate is the most mature candidate in the race who has demonstrated the most serious approach to their job as a public servant.

Well put.

Imagine if every member of Congress explained each of their votes. Especially if they were honest about it.

"This bill was garbage but the Whip told me to vote for it or they would take my committee assignment."
"I didn't read the bill but one of my donors will benefit from it so I voted yes."
"I voted no because not enough money was going to my district."

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16649
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3111 on: May 05, 2020, 11:56:17 AM »
what is he wasting his time for? It'll secure him a spot in consulting, media, or a think tank.

Based on the fact that he turned down a Colbert slot after his impeachment vote, I don't think he's all that interested in the publicity or riches.

This is a guy who wrote an entire explanation of every single vote he took. There is every piece of evidence to suggest he is acting in good faith and no reason to suggest he is not.

He has made it clear that he views the Trump presidency as hazardous to the constitution and I think he does not shy away from sharing his view that Biden is lacking the alacrity for the most important position in the US, in addition to Biden showing he will continue the lack of financial responsibility which we've grown accustomed to ever since GWB.

My suspicion is that if the DNC would have ended up with someone like Buttigieg, he probably wouldn't be running. But what adult American isn't looking at the current candidates and shaking their head wishing for at least one of the following: Someone who hasn't been eligible for SS checks for the past decade, Someone who doesn't resort to bellicose chest thumping when challenged, someone who knows what the word bellicose means, or someone who isn't white.

I get that 3rd party runs are usually quixotic and somewhat immature. But in this case the 3rd party candidate is the most mature candidate in the race who has demonstrated the most serious approach to their job as a public servant.

Well put.

Imagine if every member of Congress explained each of their votes. Especially if they were honest about it.

"This bill was garbage but the Whip told me to vote for it or they would take my committee assignment."
"I didn't read the bill but one of my donors will benefit from it so I voted yes."
"I voted no because not enough money was going to my district."

"Spite" - Mitch McConnell

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3112 on: May 05, 2020, 12:36:52 PM »
Nah.  Mitch has always operated under a single premise: retaining power [damn all consequences]. 

Financial.Velociraptor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1633
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Houston TX
  • Devour your prey raptors!
    • Financial Velociraptor
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3113 on: May 05, 2020, 12:43:32 PM »
Recent state by state polling shows Biden gaining a lead equal to the MoE in North Carolina as of 5MAY2020.

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
  • Location: South Korea
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3114 on: May 05, 2020, 06:25:01 PM »
Nah.  Mitch has always operated under a single premise: retaining power [damn all consequences].

The day after Republicans took over the House he stood in front of the press and said his sole purpose in life was to screw President Obama. I'd call that spiteful, or at least petty and counterproductive.

His grip on power is curious. The Senate Majority Leader controls what gets discussed and voted on in the Senate which McConnell (and Reid before him) used like a partisan broadsword; however, Trump's popularity completely neutered him. While his message and tactics haven't changed, he does exactly what President Trump wants without discussion.  He admitted in an interview he didn't want Trump to win.  After it was clear he was sweeping aside the rest of the candidates, McConnell suddenly had to play ball with a guy way more popular than him.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3115 on: May 05, 2020, 07:46:49 PM »
Nah.  Mitch has always operated under a single premise: retaining power [damn all consequences].

The day after Republicans took over the House he stood in front of the press and said his sole purpose in life was to screw President Obama. I'd call that spiteful, or at least petty and counterproductive.


Remember that was the election of the Tea Party.  The “Hell No” faction. Declaring that his sole purpose was to screw Obama was catering to this new power in the GOP.

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
  • Location: South Korea
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3116 on: May 05, 2020, 09:05:13 PM »
Nah.  Mitch has always operated under a single premise: retaining power [damn all consequences].

The day after Republicans took over the House he stood in front of the press and said his sole purpose in life was to screw President Obama. I'd call that spiteful, or at least petty and counterproductive.


Remember that was the election of the Tea Party.  The “Hell No” faction. Declaring that his sole purpose was to screw Obama was catering to this new power in the GOP.

Which didn't last long. Closing ranks against the Tea Party was the one thing the more conventional Rs and Ds could agree on.

maizefolk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4861
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3117 on: May 06, 2020, 09:57:56 AM »
I don't disagree when it comes to Amash's appeal (or lack thereof) to people who consider themselves democrats. However, getting the votes of only registered democrats generally isn't enough to win elections at a national level.

That's not always true is you have a charismatic and exciting candidate what can drive a lot of new turnout from the base (Obama in 2008).

But Biden in 2020 isn't Obama in 2008. If Biden is going to win he will need a fair number of independents in addition to democrats.

Why wouldn't Amash get just as many votes as Gary Johnson did in 2016? Why wouldn't Biden get just as many votes as Clinton, considering that they're both establishment candidates and same ol'-same ol'?

I don't know about the why, but here is the first poll I've seen that tested Biden/Trump and Biden/Trump/Amash.

Quote
A new Monmouth poll finds Joe Biden leading Donald Trump among registered voters, 50% to 41% with another 3% saying they would vote for an independent candidate and 5% undecided.

When Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan is added to the mix as a Libertarian candidate, Biden gets 47%, Trump gets 40% and Amash gets 5%.

So here Amash pulled 3% from Biden, 1% from Trump and 1% from otherwise undecided. If that 3:1 ratio of otherwise Biden voters to otherwise Trump voters holds up, that'd be a significant handicap to Biden in a close election.

An important caveat on that 5% support for Amash overall though is that polling tends to over estimate support for 3rd party candidates. Not sure if it's people changing their minds when they are actually in the voting booth or people supporting a 3rd party candidate being less motivated to actually go out and vote knowing their candidate is unlikely to win.

secondcor521

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3137
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Boise, Idaho
  • Big cattle, no hat.
    • Age of Eon - Overwatch player videos
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3118 on: May 06, 2020, 12:37:19 PM »
I don't disagree when it comes to Amash's appeal (or lack thereof) to people who consider themselves democrats. However, getting the votes of only registered democrats generally isn't enough to win elections at a national level.

That's not always true is you have a charismatic and exciting candidate what can drive a lot of new turnout from the base (Obama in 2008).

But Biden in 2020 isn't Obama in 2008. If Biden is going to win he will need a fair number of independents in addition to democrats.

Why wouldn't Amash get just as many votes as Gary Johnson did in 2016? Why wouldn't Biden get just as many votes as Clinton, considering that they're both establishment candidates and same ol'-same ol'?

I don't know about the why, but here is the first poll I've seen that tested Biden/Trump and Biden/Trump/Amash.

Quote
A new Monmouth poll finds Joe Biden leading Donald Trump among registered voters, 50% to 41% with another 3% saying they would vote for an independent candidate and 5% undecided.

When Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan is added to the mix as a Libertarian candidate, Biden gets 47%, Trump gets 40% and Amash gets 5%.

So here Amash pulled 3% from Biden, 1% from Trump and 1% from otherwise undecided. If that 3:1 ratio of otherwise Biden voters to otherwise Trump voters holds up, that'd be a significant handicap to Biden in a close election.

An important caveat on that 5% support for Amash overall though is that polling tends to over estimate support for 3rd party candidates. Not sure if it's people changing their minds when they are actually in the voting booth or people supporting a 3rd party candidate being less motivated to actually go out and vote knowing their candidate is unlikely to win.

Interesting poll.

A couple of things I've learned from 538 is to look at margin of error, and whether it's registered voters or likely voters.  This particular poll is at 3.6% and is registered voters.  It's also a phone poll; with so many people on cell phones not answering, I think those are going to have more and more trouble over time.

I'm not 100% sure, but since those where-Amash-pulls-voters-from numbers are below the margin of error, they're essentially meaningless.  Especially since the overall N=739 means that the 5% number is only 37 voters - shouldn't the subset have a larger margin of error than the overall poll?  I think it does but my statistics knowledge is pretty weak.

All this is not to pick on you, @maizeman; I bet you know all of the above.  It's more that your post was a good jumping off place to the points above that I felt like making.

maizefolk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4861
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3119 on: May 06, 2020, 05:18:28 PM »
Interesting poll.

A couple of things I've learned from 538 is to look at margin of error, and whether it's registered voters or likely voters.  This particular poll is at 3.6% and is registered voters.  It's also a phone poll; with so many people on cell phones not answering, I think those are going to have more and more trouble over time.

I'm not 100% sure, but since those where-Amash-pulls-voters-from numbers are below the margin of error, they're essentially meaningless.  Especially since the overall N=739 means that the 5% number is only 37 voters - shouldn't the subset have a larger margin of error than the overall poll?  I think it does but my statistics knowledge is pretty weak.

All this is not to pick on you, @maizeman; I bet you know all of the above.  It's more that your post was a good jumping off place to the points above that I felt like making.

No offense taken (although I do appreciate the disclaimer!).

I think I have a few answers, but up front I'll agree with you that this is a single poll and we shouldn't read too much into it until we have more data. But going from zero empirical data to a little is still pretty fun. That said:

1) My understanding is that likely voter filters tend to work better close to an election and not so well months in advance, so they're rare this far out and more common closer to the election.

2) Poll response rates have gone up a lot during the lockdown. This is particularly true for groups that tend to be hard to reach (and hence have very high error rates) like young people and people who only have cell phones. Before pollsters might have to dial on the order of 20-40 numbers to get one person to talk to them, and the people who answered tended to be a very nonrandom sample of the population. So polls are keeping cheaper to do (fewer calls for the same number of datapoints) and sampling the a wider range of the population.

3) The error rates for small subgroups as a percentage of those small subgroups are higher, but smaller as a percentage of the total respondents.

Let's say there are exactly 39 Amash supporters in the poll and 23 switched from Biden, 8 switched from Trump, and 8 from undecided. We'll ignore the undecided and treat this as a binary choice from-Biden and from-Trump (so 23 and 8, 31 total datapoints). In this case 74% of voters who switched to Amash came from Biden, and a 95% confidence binomial interval is 55%-88% of voters who switch to Amash came from Biden rather than Trump. That's a huge margin of error as a percentage of total Amash supporters, but it works out to +/- 1% of the total poll respondents, much smaller than the margin of error who is leading in the overall Trump/Biden race.

This is still simplified since is assumes the pollster isn't over or under weighting certain responses to fit their model of the electorate (which all pollsters do), but hopefully it gives a sense of why small subgroup analyses can both have greater uncertainty than the overall poll while still having less uncertainly when expressed as a percentage of total poll respondents.*

*A lot of this is cribbed from arguing with people back when Andrew Yang was pulling 3-4% polling results -- and many other democrats were consistently polling 0-1% -- who would say that since the poll has a 3-4% MoE, Yang's support was statistically no different from zero.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3120 on: May 06, 2020, 10:08:24 PM »
Seems like the Libertarians might be a little hard.  Here's what they are about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)

"The Libertarian Party supports laissez-faire capitalism and the abolition of the modern welfare state."

All of these layoff the past 30 years since Reagan was president hurt a lot of people.  This laissez- faire thing could hurt a lot of people.  I would think abolition of the modern welfare state could include unemployment compensation and aid for education.  Sounds backwards.

"We should eliminate the entire social welfare system. This includes eliminating food stamps, subsidized housing, and all the rest. Individuals who are unable to fully support themselves and their families through the job market must, once again, learn to rely on supportive family, church, community, or private charity to bridge the gap.[98]"

Seems a bit like a fantasy world.

"The Libertarian Party believes government regulations in the form of minimum wage laws drive up the cost of employing additional workers.[100] That is why Libertarians favor loosening minimum wage laws so that overall unemployment rate can be reduced and low-wage workers, unskilled workers, visa immigrants and those with limited education or job experience can find employment.[101]"

Maybe the slave thing would work for them.  That's employment - sort of.

"The party supports ending the public school system.[102] The party's official platform states that education is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality,"

Are all these Libertarian people the children of the rich or something?  No public schools? Nah!

Now there are three presidential candidates who I don't like, too bad.  Is there another third party out there that is maybe a bit less crazy?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16649
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3121 on: May 07, 2020, 07:35:47 AM »
Seems a bit like a fantasy world.

This is a fair summary of Libertarianism.  It's an appealing theory/idea that has never once worked in reality.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3122 on: May 07, 2020, 07:49:13 AM »
Seems a bit like a fantasy world.

This is a fair summary of Libertarianism.  It's an appealing theory/idea that has never once worked in reality.

Instead of coming up with some great new utopian plan of attack, maybe it's better to just look around the world and see what works.  Then just copy it.

It worked for me in the 4th grade, I copied Billy's papers and got A's.

maizefolk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4861
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3123 on: May 07, 2020, 07:54:47 AM »
Now there are three presidential candidates who I don't like, too bad.  Is there another third party out there that is maybe a bit less crazy?

The next biggest 3rd party (4th party) after the libertarians are the greens. So far on the ballot in only 24 states for 2020. In 2016 the Greens ran Jill Stein who thinks children shouldn't be exposed to wifi, and has "real questions" about the use of vaccination.

In 2020 they may end up nominating Jesse Ventura (ex-wrestler and ex-governor) who has his own warts but at least isn't as anti-science as Stein and has a history of having won elected office in the past.

After that you get into the super minor parties (5th parties?) like the constitution party. In 2016 the constitution party received about 1/20th the votes of the libertarian party, which in turn received about 1/14th the number of votes as Trump (the person elected president).

And given what I know of your political positions pecunia, I do not believe you would care for the constitution party platform.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3124 on: May 07, 2020, 08:02:07 AM »
Now there are three presidential candidates who I don't like, too bad.  Is there another third party out there that is maybe a bit less crazy?

The next biggest 3rd party (4th party) after the libertarians are the greens. So far on the ballot in only 24 states for 2020. In 2016 the Greens ran Jill Stein who thinks children shouldn't be exposed to wifi, and has "real questions" about the use of vaccination.

In 2020 they may end up nominating Jesse Ventura (ex-wrestler and ex-governor) who has his own warts but at least isn't as anti-science as Stein and has a history of having won elected office in the past.

After that you get into the super minor parties (5th parties?) like the constitution party. In 2016 the constitution party received about 1/20th the votes of the libertarian party, which in turn received about 1/14th the number of votes as Trump (the person elected president).

And given what I know of your political positions pecunia, I do not believe you would care for the constitution party platform.

I was shocked during the 2016 election when I voted and discovered there were something like 9 candidates on the ballot for President.  Trump, Clinton, Stein, Johnson.. and then about five more I knew nothing about and who’s name I didn’t recognize. 

IIRC it included the constitutional party, the socialist party, and some others I can’t remember now.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3125 on: May 07, 2020, 08:18:59 AM »

- SNIP -

And given what I know of your political positions pecunia, I do not believe you would care for the constitution party platform.

Well - I did agree with some portion of what they believe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_Party_(United_States)

However, I saw these things:

"The Constitution Party in 2012 called for phasing out social security.[81] The 2016 platform states: "Social Security is a form of individual welfare not authorized in the Constitution".[78]"

Lots of old people depend on Social Security and because they are old they cannot adapt to an alternate system.  Getting rid of it would be just cruel.

"The party rejects the scientific consensus on climate change, saying that "globalists are using the global warming threat to gain more control via worldwide sustainable development"."

This seems a little whacko.  Glaciers are melting, the Gulf Stream may get screwed up, some little countries may actually disappear, the warming is enabling invasive species to kill forests and lots of other evidence which point to this being a real problem.  I mean I don't think all these scientists that tell us this is a real problem were the ones hired by the tobacco industry and are lying.

Thanks for the suggestion.

 


J Boogie

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1360
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3126 on: May 07, 2020, 09:03:02 AM »
Seems a bit like a fantasy world.

This is a fair summary of Libertarianism.  It's an appealing theory/idea that has never once worked in reality.

Given Amash's interest in practicality I don't think things like getting rid of all welfare or public schools will be anywhere near his platform. He has explicitly mentioned the govt should keep its promises made to seniors via social security and reform it for the future generations.

He is focused more on implementing more mainstream libertarian ideas like limiting executive power, balancing the budget, and protecting freedoms that have been eroded by widespread govt surveillance programs.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3127 on: May 07, 2020, 10:14:26 AM »
You remember that time at the libertarian debate when the audience booed Gary Johnson for saying that he thought Driver's Licenses were still a good idea. Yeah, not too many "mainstream" libertarian ideas that don't already overlap with Neoliberal ideology.

PathtoFIRE

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Dallas
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3128 on: May 07, 2020, 10:51:27 AM »
Instead of coming up with some great new utopian plan of attack, maybe it's better to just look around the world and see what works.  Then just copy it.

It worked for me in the 4th grade, I copied Billy's papers and got A's.

The Democratic Party today reads most closely with what you say above, I'm a little surprised you are not more enthused with the Ds, although if it's more of an anti-Biden thing, well I was certainly against him before I was for him too.

You have Obama and the ACA architects cribbing from a Republican state health insurance plan, you have Bernie asking why we're not emulating Nordic countries with regards to some policies. Just the first two to come to mind, maybe someone else can chime in with other examples. But it seems like on a national level at least, the Democrats are the party of practicality. Now maybe you don't think the problems that they are trying to tackle are problems, maybe you don't like the current quarterback. But that's still the team that I'd want to back, the one that's going to actually listen when confronted with disagreement even if it may not be ultimately persuaded, the one that doesn't think that all of the answers come from dogmatic interpretation of our sacred texts (I mean that in both a religious and non-religious sense).

J Boogie

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1360
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3129 on: May 07, 2020, 10:56:40 AM »
You remember that time at the libertarian debate when the audience booed Gary Johnson for saying that he thought Driver's Licenses were still a good idea. Yeah, not too many "mainstream" libertarian ideas that don't already overlap with Neoliberal ideology.

The libertarian party is always in this awkward place of having to accept the fact that their best bet for a nominee is always a "small l" libertarian who isn't REALLY one of them and certainly doesn't want to be seen with them and their bow ties and gold bullion.

It's kind of like if the nerd table at high school produces homecoming royalty. They know they have to avoid ostentatious shows of in group solidarity such as addressing the chosen one as their dungeons and dragons character when they pass them in the hallway.

maizefolk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4861
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3130 on: May 07, 2020, 11:14:33 AM »
You remember that time at the libertarian debate when the audience booed Gary Johnson for saying that he thought Driver's Licenses were still a good idea. Yeah, not too many "mainstream" libertarian ideas that don't already overlap with Neoliberal ideology.

The libertarian party is always in this awkward place of having to accept the fact that their best bet for a nominee is always a "small l" libertarian who isn't REALLY one of them and certainly doesn't want to be seen with them and their bow ties and gold bullion.

It's kind of like if the nerd table at high school produces homecoming royalty. They know they have to avoid ostentatious shows of in group solidarity such as addressing the chosen one as their dungeons and dragons character when they pass them in the hallway.

I completely agree, which is part of why I think Amash has the potential to do better than the average libertarian nominee.

Since he didn't come up through the libertarian party, he hasn't been subjected to the purity tests required to be a "big L" Libertarian (where idealism trumps practicality and pragmatism). But he's widely known enough that he can get away with being the "small l" variety* and likely still get their nomination and hence ballot access.

*Essentially just a convenient label for not agreeing with the GOP's social agenda or the democratic party's fiscal agenda.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3914
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3131 on: May 07, 2020, 12:42:59 PM »
Seems like the Libertarians might be a little hard.  Here's what they are about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)

"The Libertarian Party supports laissez-faire capitalism and the abolition of the modern welfare state."

All of these layoff the past 30 years since Reagan was president hurt a lot of people.  This laissez- faire thing could hurt a lot of people.  I would think abolition of the modern welfare state could include unemployment compensation and aid for education.  Sounds backwards.

"We should eliminate the entire social welfare system. This includes eliminating food stamps, subsidized housing, and all the rest. Individuals who are unable to fully support themselves and their families through the job market must, once again, learn to rely on supportive family, church, community, or private charity to bridge the gap.[98]"

Seems a bit like a fantasy world.

"The Libertarian Party believes government regulations in the form of minimum wage laws drive up the cost of employing additional workers.[100] That is why Libertarians favor loosening minimum wage laws so that overall unemployment rate can be reduced and low-wage workers, unskilled workers, visa immigrants and those with limited education or job experience can find employment.[101]"

Maybe the slave thing would work for them.  That's employment - sort of.

"The party supports ending the public school system.[102] The party's official platform states that education is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality,"

Are all these Libertarian people the children of the rich or something?  No public schools? Nah!

Now there are three presidential candidates who I don't like, too bad.  Is there another third party out there that is maybe a bit less crazy?

I went to a talk that was designed to recruit people for Libertarianism. It was delivered by the retiring President of the Board of BBT bank. Gov't was very good to him in 2009.

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
  • Location: South Korea
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3132 on: May 07, 2020, 05:48:57 PM »
I was going to take a swipe at that Libertarian wiki entry, but a couple of you already made the point. Talking about the "Libertarian Party" like it's a single entity with one voice is stretching it. They all seem to agree that "centralized government is bad," but then go in different directions on by how much or how to get there.  The Tea Party was much the same way. They all agreed that the current way of doing business wasn't working, but didn't all agree on exactly the same platform.  The only thing they could agree on was voting no or otherwise arranging for Congress to deadlock.

Libertarians will split depending on their location and demographic. My uncle lived in Nevada for most of his life and he proudly proclaims he's Libertarian, but mostly where it applies to the 2nd Amendment and anything Democrats believe in.  He's drawing social security with the reasoning that he already paid for it so he should get to use it, but also thinks its socialist.  I've met some urban-dwelling Libertarians who expect tax-funded services to exist like police and fire, but are more focused on not liking Big Brother.  The most die-hard ones seem to be those who live in rural areas and are capable of living the unplugged, mostly self-sufficient lifestyle they preach about, but somehow expect every else to be able to do the same. My neighbor's wife in Colorado went on a Libertarian rant about how there shouldn't be taxes or government, while her husband was a retired soldier working as a military contractor on the base.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3133 on: May 08, 2020, 06:08:59 AM »
I was going to take a swipe at that Libertarian wiki entry, but a couple of you already made the point. Talking about the "Libertarian Party" like it's a single entity with one voice is stretching it. They all seem to agree that "centralized government is bad," but then go in different directions on by how much or how to get there.  The Tea Party was much the same way. They all agreed that the current way of doing business wasn't working, but didn't all agree on exactly the same platform.  The only thing they could agree on was voting no or otherwise arranging for Congress to deadlock.

Libertarians will split depending on their location and demographic. My uncle lived in Nevada for most of his life and he proudly proclaims he's Libertarian, but mostly where it applies to the 2nd Amendment and anything Democrats believe in.  He's drawing social security with the reasoning that he already paid for it so he should get to use it, but also thinks its socialist.  I've met some urban-dwelling Libertarians who expect tax-funded services to exist like police and fire, but are more focused on not liking Big Brother.  The most die-hard ones seem to be those who live in rural areas and are capable of living the unplugged, mostly self-sufficient lifestyle they preach about, but somehow expect every else to be able to do the same. My neighbor's wife in Colorado went on a Libertarian rant about how there shouldn't be taxes or government, while her husband was a retired soldier working as a military contractor on the base.

Everybody's a little bit libertarian - against gun control? For abortions? They've got you covered.

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3134 on: May 08, 2020, 07:07:38 AM »
Wasn't Ron Paul opposed to abortion?

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3135 on: May 08, 2020, 07:47:14 AM »
Wasn't Ron Paul opposed to abortion?

It kind of looked like it on this short video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_iYEkA1rCg




former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5815
  • Location: Avalon
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3136 on: May 08, 2020, 08:16:53 AM »
Wasn't Ron Paul opposed to abortion?
Don't you mean "Wasn't Ron Paul in favour of the government controlling women's bodies?"

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3137 on: May 08, 2020, 08:19:12 AM »
Wasn't Ron Paul opposed to abortion?

In general, libertarians stand with Democrats on this issue:

1.5 Abortion
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

https://www.lp.org/platform/

May not be as extreme as Democrats on the issue, but pretty closely in line.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5668
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3138 on: May 08, 2020, 08:28:02 AM »
Wasn't Ron Paul opposed to abortion?

In general, libertarians stand with Democrats on this issue:

1.5 Abortion
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

https://www.lp.org/platform/

May not be as extreme as Democrats on the issue, but pretty closely in line.

How are Democrats more extreme on that?

cliffhanger

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 150
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3139 on: May 08, 2020, 08:28:27 AM »
Amash is against abortion as well.

I could be mistaken, since I haven't followed Ron Paul in years, but I think he's personally opposed to abortion but wants the states to have their own policy towards it.

Michael in ABQ

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
    • Military Saints
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3140 on: May 08, 2020, 08:31:30 AM »
Wasn't Ron Paul opposed to abortion?
Don't you mean "Wasn't Ron Paul in favour of the government controlling women's bodies?"

Don't you mean wasn't Ron Paul in favor of not killing people before they're born?

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3141 on: May 08, 2020, 08:35:19 AM »
Wasn't Ron Paul opposed to abortion?
Don't you mean "Wasn't Ron Paul in favour of the government controlling women's bodies?"

Don't you mean wasn't Ron Paul in favor of not killing people before they're born?

I don't.  As a biologist I do not consider a non-viable embryo or early stage fetus to be a person.
Certainly you seem to disagree.


ETA:  This is clearly Off Thread, so I am ending my discussion of it here.  These sorts of divergences go no where.
~n~
« Last Edit: May 08, 2020, 08:57:35 AM by nereo »

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13562
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3142 on: May 08, 2020, 08:58:06 AM »
Wasn't Ron Paul opposed to abortion?
Don't you mean "Wasn't Ron Paul in favour of the government controlling women's bodies?"

Don't you mean wasn't Ron Paul in favor of not killing people before they're born?

I don't.  As a biologist I do not consider a non-viable embryo or early stage fetus to be a person.
Certainly you seem to disagree.

As a biologist, how do you define viability? Survival without medical intervention? Something else?

See above.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3143 on: May 08, 2020, 09:06:27 AM »
Wasn't Ron Paul opposed to abortion?

In general, libertarians stand with Democrats on this issue:

1.5 Abortion
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.

https://www.lp.org/platform/

May not be as extreme as Democrats on the issue, but pretty closely in line.

How are Democrats more extreme on that?

Well, one example is the Democrats support federal funding of abortions, which I'm very certain the Libertarians would not.

MKinVA

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 326
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3144 on: May 08, 2020, 09:17:56 AM »
https://www.msnbc.com/hallie-jackson/watch/rep-amash-on-potential-run-for-white-house-82749509900

Interview with Amash on MSNBC (his first since announcing). He seems to be saying the same thing 3rd party candidates always say "give people a choice, I represent what the people really want, I am a Libertarian because I am not the other guy, blah, blah, blah". Third parties will never get a foothold until they insist that the candidates that they run uphold their values and positions on issues. He maintains that he is a Libertarian because he is against the way in which the administration/Congress is giving out money. But he would still give out money. 

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3145 on: May 08, 2020, 10:04:24 AM »
The LP is super pathetic, the party of principle will sell its soul for a celebrity candidate.  Maybe if they actually ran a real died in the wool libertarian they would be more impactful.  Right now they are a joke.

In my county they ran an "animal rights advocate" for county supervisor.  Nothing at to do with any liberty issue.  Sad.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2020, 10:16:31 AM by jim555 »

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3146 on: May 08, 2020, 10:25:54 AM »
Well the real problem is that 3rd parties can't win smaller seats in government. And if they do, they are more or less relegated to permanent minority party status leaving them without power even when the political winds change. Which is why people like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson had to run as GOP in order to actually get anywhere.

3rd parties have no power because of the way Congress operates, not because they don't have the right man at the top of the ticket.

You can find a few localities where a 3rd party may have won a small seat here or there, but there isn't a single state where a 3rd party has ever broken past what 3 seats at any one time? If a 3rd party had any long-term sense, they'd run a president for media attention, but would also focus on taking over the politics of a single state where they had the best chance. I imagine something like this might be easiest to do in Nebraska's unicameral system, but I'm also unsure what political agenda can separate you from the 2 main parties that neither one of them would be willing to fold into their state platform.

Libertarians however, since they are funded by the Koch brothers, are nearly identical to the GOP and don't make sense as a 3rd party.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3147 on: May 08, 2020, 11:20:18 AM »
OK - So much for the Libertarians.  How about the Green Party?

Cleaning up the Earth, stopping global warming.  Are they a healthy alternative?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_of_the_United_States

Let's see.  They want to provide health care and education.  Hmmm, might be OK.

"In 2016, the Green Party passed a motion in favor of rejecting both capitalism and state socialism, and instead supporting "alternative economic system based on ecology and decentralization of power".[2] The motion states the change that the party says could be described as promoting "'ecological socialism,' 'communalism,' or the 'cooperative commonwealth'".[2]"

It kind of reminds me of the Bolsheviks.  That kind of stuff never seemed to work too well.  Would rejecting capitalism include both big business and small business?  Seems like a real cutoff to opportunity and freedom.  What is state socialism?  Is this public schools, public roads and libraries?  Will they be closing public parks?

Maybe some of you folks can clarify what their motion was really asking for.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3914
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3148 on: May 08, 2020, 11:56:14 AM »
Well the real problem is that 3rd parties can't win smaller seats in government. And if they do, they are more or less relegated to permanent minority party status leaving them without power even when the political winds change. Which is why people like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson had to run as GOP in order to actually get anywhere.


Libertarians however, since they are funded by the Koch brothers, are nearly identical to the GOP and don't make sense as a 3rd party.

This is the part that makes libertarians (I accept the above discussion that Ron Paul and Rand Paul are not the only libertarians) and the Tea Party seem like similar groups. The Koch network did a fabulous job of mobilizing tea party turnout in 2010 - 2014.

Michael in ABQ

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
    • Military Saints
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #3149 on: May 09, 2020, 09:08:24 AM »
Well the real problem is that 3rd parties can't win smaller seats in government. And if they do, they are more or less relegated to permanent minority party status leaving them without power even when the political winds change. Which is why people like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson had to run as GOP in order to actually get anywhere.

3rd parties have no power because of the way Congress operates, not because they don't have the right man at the top of the ticket.

You can find a few localities where a 3rd party may have won a small seat here or there, but there isn't a single state where a 3rd party has ever broken past what 3 seats at any one time? If a 3rd party had any long-term sense, they'd run a president for media attention, but would also focus on taking over the politics of a single state where they had the best chance. I imagine something like this might be easiest to do in Nebraska's unicameral system, but I'm also unsure what political agenda can separate you from the 2 main parties that neither one of them would be willing to fold into their state platform.

Libertarians however, since they are funded by the Koch brothers, are nearly identical to the GOP and don't make sense as a 3rd party.

This was the idea of the Free State Project in New Hampshire. https://www.fsp.org

Some libertarian ideas have been co-opted by the major parties. New Mexico passed a law to stop civil asset forfeiture and other states and localities have as well. Marijuana has been legalized in a large portion of the country. Criminal justice reform is being discussed and some positive changes have been made there. Ultimately is it more important that the ideas are implemented or a particular person/party wins?